MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399880631 · doi:10.1080/00102202.2024.2365260

Advance in Detection and Management for Underground Coal Fires: A Global Technological Overview

2024· article· en· W4399880631 on OpenAlexaff
Y. T. Gu, Haidong Li, Longhui Dou, Meng Wu, Huina Guo, Wenshi Huang, Junping Gu, Saeideh Babaee, Liangliang Jiang, Lele Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueCombustion Science and Technology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCoal Properties and Utilization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersWuhan UniversityNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsCoalEnvironmental sciencePetroleum engineeringWaste managementGeologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ongoing spontaneous combustion of coal seams beneath the earth’s surface leads to the exhaustion of nonrenewable resources and poses a substantial threat to environmental integrity. Precise and efficacious monitoring of subsurface coal fire activities is an indispensable precondition for the prevention and management of coalfield conflagrations, as well as for the exploitation of geothermal energy resources. The accurate detection and localization of covert coal fires depend on the procurement and analytical assessment of distribution data for parameters that are intrinsically linked to the activities associated with coal combustion. To this end, our review work investigated the theoretical foundations, application effects, and inherent limitations of the diverse detection techniques currently available. It has been observed that the ambiguities inherent to individual detection tools can be effectively mitigated through the cross validation of findings derived from multiple detection tools. The role of detection tools can be extended to the entire process of coal fire management, yet the distinct contributions of each tool throughout the various stages of the process warrant further investigation and elucidation. In addition, the potential of emerging technologies such as machine learning algorithms and 5 G networks to promote automation and intelligence in coal fire management work was also discussed. It is our hope that the insights presented herein will serve as a valuable resource for policymakers and stakeholders in the formulation of effective strategies for the prevention and control of coalfield fires.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCombustion Science and TechnologySame topicCoal Properties and UtilizationFrench-language works237,207